On Mon, 6 Apr 2009, Kalman Noel wrote:
> I'm not complaining, and I'm not sure what I mean :) I may like a scheme
> where functions operating on a type or type class live in a module
> seperate from the type (class) definition, so you could import a
> specific module to get only, say, (Ring, (*), one, ...). But that would
> be too tedious in the Haskell hierarchical module system, which is why I
> was asking about others.
It was precisely my goal to bundle the type with the functions that
operate on it. Why do you want to separate them?